In re Corey D.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Corey D.

279 A.D.2d 716, 719 N.Y.S.2d 612, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 268

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 11, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 279 A.D.2d 716 (In re Corey D.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Corey D., 279 A.D.2d 716, 719 N.Y.S.2d 612, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 268 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Crew III, J. P.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Broome County (Ray, J.), entered May 6, 1999, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, to extend respondent’s placement with petitioner.

In October 1996, respondent was adjudicated a juvenile delinquent and placed with petitioner. Respondent’s placement in this regard subsequently was extended to April 1999 and, prior thereto, petitioner applied for an additional six-month extension. Based upon the parties’ consent, Family Court again extended respondent’s placement with petitioner until October 1999. Respondent now appeals, contending that Family Court failed to make sufficient factual findings to justify the requested extension.

The record reflects that the order extending respondent’s [717]*717placement expired in October 1999, and the Attorney General advises us that respondent was in fact released from petitioner’s custody at that time. That being the case, the instant appeal is moot (see, Matter of Mark J., 259 AD2d 40, 43).

Spain, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Crew III, J. P.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Broome County (Ray, J.), entered May 6, 1999, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, to extend respondent’s placement with petitioner.

In October 1996, respondent was adjudicated a juvenile delinquent and placed with petitioner. Respondent’s placement in this regard subsequently was extended to April 1999 and, prior thereto, petitioner applied for an additional six-month extension. Based upon the parties’ consent, Family Court again extended respondent’s placement with petitioner until October 1999. Respondent now appeals, contending that Family Court failed to make sufficient factual findings to justify the requested extension.

The record reflects that the order extending respondent’s [717]*717placement expired in October 1999, and the Attorney General advises us that respondent was in fact released from petitioner’s custody at that time. That being the case, the instant appeal is moot (see, Matter of Mark J., 259 AD2d 40, 43).

Spain, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 A.D.2d 716, 719 N.Y.S.2d 612, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-corey-d-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack